The chapter opens with an 1881 French annulment petition involving a wealthy 22 year-old woman and a younger non-wealthy aristocrat. The case—which involved “doubtful sex” was covered in detail in the French press and even made it to the New York Times under the headline “Queer French Lawsuit.” [See side-note below.] (Note that both parties were Spanish, though the court case was in France.) The arrangement was planned as a double wedding, Mercedes de Campo to the young (less than 18-year-old) Count San Antonio, and San Antonio’s sister to Mercedes’ brother.
France
Covering approximately the region of modern France in western Europe, or to topics relating to French-language culture in Europe.
LHMP entry
[Note: The author assumes a detailed knowledge of the central topic of the chapter, Herculine Barbin. To contextualize the material, here is some background, based largely on Wikipedia. Barbin was classified as female at birth and was educated at a convent school. There she fell in love with a fellow female student, then later with a fellow female teacher. Severe abdominal pain led her to a series of medical examinations, which identified anomalies in her anatomy.]
The introduction opens, as is often the case, with a case history illustrating the main theme of the book. A patient was referred to a doctor for “suffering in the genital parts” and on examination the doctor could make no solid conclusion about what sex the person was. Not only did the person have ambiguous genitals, but they performed socially alternately as a woman (at home) and a man (outside the home).
Amadis de Gaule is the French name for a massive romance cycle popular across Europe in various languages. The original story in four volumes composed in the 14th century in Spain was expanded and extended by at least seven different authors into 21 volumes in the French version (the best known). The core story is a chivalric adventures of a young man – the child of a star crossed royal love affair – and the obstacles to his romance with Oriana. The additional volumes follow various secondary characters from the original tale.
[Note: the story of Grisandole has an interesting parallel to the Romance of Silence in the episode about the quest for Merlin and the revelation of Silence’s gender. Although this article is strongly focused on the sources, parallels, and variant versions of the story, it omits any mention of Silence for the simple reason that the article was published in 1907 and the single manuscript of Silence was only rediscovered in 1911.]
Rather than focusing on the titular character of Silence, this article compares the two similarly-named characters, Silence’s mother Eufemie and Silence’s antagonist, Queen Eufeme, as exemplars of “good” and “bad” female sexuality. The cross-dressed Silence is treated as asexual in this analysis.
The appendices consist of several types of information. The first section covers technical reference data:
This section, naturally, sums up the author’s purposes and results. Lister’s records had multiple functions. [Note: One hesitates to call them “purposes” as the functions likely emerged from the practice, rather than being a design feature.] The detailed and structured record of her activities, thoughts, and experiences create a type of autobiography, while at the same time not being designed as a literary work or coherent narrative. The function of her correspondence was to create and maintain a social network that included family, friends, and lovers.
Lister’s habit of using code phrases for meaningful events and concepts is particularly evident in language around desire. One especially colorful expression was “going to Italy.” Whitbread interpreted this as indicating a fully sexual relationship, but Orr opines that the evidence for this is not included in the excerpts in No Priest But Love, and that the meaning is more nuanced. The other method of signifying especially noteworthy progress in the relationship was with a triple Silcrow symbol.
This section uses Listers discussion with Barlow of her sexual history to lay out both that history and the context in which she shares it, and how that reflects the progression of the Barlow romance. Some of the filtering of the information is marked by how Lister describes her sharing as “the story,” “nearly the whole story,” “nearly the real story,” and similar qualifications. “Story” did not imply a fiction but simply referred to a communication. Such stories were shared with a gradation of specificity.
Pages
